This is new leak i would say
J-10 Thread IV
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Nothing concrete just yet but EAF confirms strong collaboration with PLAAF and AVIC in improving combat readiness and aircraft manufacturing respectively.
Last edited:
If the EAF ends up buying the J-10C, then it would become the only country (thus far) to be able to game out exactly what happened between Pakistan and India on May 7th.
Take with a mountain of salt — Bangladesh is reaching out for a deal on MMRCA with the PRC.
Thanks and sorry for being late; it was a long day yesterday, but here it is for anyone interested:
Reply to Q1: Well, that's difficult to answer briefly because you would have to go into the background and the actually long - and for a long time not really successful - development of the J-10. Moreover, history has proven helpful, even if this didn't seem to be an advantage for a long time: But regardless, the J-10 was created as a much-needed successor to the old J-7 fleet - and thus very similar to the Tejas in India to replace the MiG-21 fleet - ... the most important difference, however, was that China was able to develop a larger, and therefore more multi-role-oriented type (even if the first A version was almost a pure fighter), which at least had the potential to become a decent 4th / 4.5th generation fighter. The main obstacle up to that point was the technical limitations, for which China launched a gigantic investment and development program and very cleverly "adopted" and integrated the knowledge, technology and structure of other countries. I'm explicitly not talking about copies here, because the J-10 is definitely not a Lavi clone, that's nonsense often used to disparage it...
But anyway, this is precisely where politics played an important role: From the early to mid-1980s until 1989, China had a brief opportunity to gain insight into high-end technology and the concepts behind it through rapprochement with the West... that was the impetus for the Lavi, US sensors, and other systems like radars and missiles. After the end of the Peace Pearl program, contact almost completely broke down, but this then enabled a renewed rapprochement with the Soviet Union, and then Russia. The collapse of the Soviet Union, in turn, led to Russia's economic situation being so dire that it was willing to sell even its most modern systems; see the AL-31FN engines, which actually saved the J-10, and the Flanker license at SAC.
So, China never really had the option of "buying stuff from those who have it," but had to invest heavily and work hard itself. The result is now a fully developed ecosystem in which the J-10 can be produced virtually entirely independently and can now finally be offered as a complete package. How much of this technology is actually new is actually irrelevant. Now, with its own WS-10B engine, I'd even say the percentage is 100%.
Reply to Q2: I have to admit, I don't like these kinds of questions because they attempt to answer a complex system or problem that is actually multidimensional in a way that is far too simplistic – one could even say one-dimensional – and naive and too brief. I even believe that this question is currently almost impossible to answer because both models are very different (and yet similar). But the main problem is that we simply know too little – I would even say “almost nothing" – from the Chinese side about the actual performance of the individual components. And these components here aren't even the radar, the armament, the engine thrust, and other hardware parameters, but rather the "package" that most decisively influences the outcome in modern warfare: how complete and comprehensive was the situational awareness, what was known about the enemy, which additional systems were in use to support it – i.e., AEW, ISR, EW, jointness – how was communication carried out... I therefore think that the success of the J-10 is based on several factors: Firstly, it is actually the first indication that Chinese systems are indeed modern – some in the West but also India might find this surprising! - , not junk or "a bad copy" – especially considering that the PL-15E deployed was obviously an export model manufactured 10 years ago! (so how "mature" and capable are the current systems, then?) – but must be taken seriously. And the second point is, I fear – although I have no evidence for this – that the Indian side either overestimated its own strength – aka the Rafale – or completely underestimated the Pakistani side and its Chinese systems. Articles by high-ranking Indian ex-military officers and alleged analysts claiming that the Rafale would easily outperform any J-20 seem to be an overly simplistic representation and viewpoint. As such, we surely need to watch this closely.
Reply to Q3: Yes, it is indeed the first time the J-10C saw action in live combat ands as such it can now be rated “battle tested”! Otherwise, yes, that’s in fact a good question and one going around since a few months. The point however is, the quality and capabilities of a certain system – here the J-10CE + its weapons – are only one side of the story. So, yes, it is a great opportunity for China to promote its own systems and as such to maybe step into the market, to offer an alternative type against Western or Russian types. But it is not only what China offers aka what can certain Chinese types in comparison to other competitors, on the other side it is a certain risk: many of these countries potentially being interested have long experiences with Western systems as such they know their strong and weak points … but IMO one of the biggest pros is an established after sales support system and I think this is what none of any potential future customers would like to miss. And that’s what I rate - at least from what I‘ve heard - a weak point for Chinese sales or at least an issue, where the Chinese do not have an established system and maybe fear a failure since this would ruin their reputation for years and as such would damage any futures sales to other countries.
So in summary, I think the J-10C + PL-15, or the KJ-500 and especially the Y-20 are indeed capable systems “that could gather a lot of interest on the market especially as the world is politically changing and since Russia in this segment is almost no longer competitive. But the point is, are the Chinese willing to sell them and can they guarantee the sales support for years? If these questions can be answered in a positive way, I think there is for the first time a good chance to break into this important market even more so for future types like the J-35 and even more so when there are no or at least lesser political strings attached.
Three mountains of salt. I have been jerked around by the BAF purchasing J-10s since I started becoming interested in defense news in 2009.
Great answers. I understand that journalists are working with limited space/words but it's still a shame to see such detailed and thorough responses get truncated down to a few soundbites in the final publication. And even so, this was a relatively good piece as news articles go.
To be fair, that journalist deserves credit for doing his homework beforehand.
Can you please share the thread link. I have been trying find it, but my account got approval very lately. Will appreciate it a lot.
It's from a podcast, which is linked in the comment
Got it, i have been trying to translate it, but somehow the google translation is not working very well. But thanks.